Standard Generator

Component Dynamic Models

Initial Draft Posting

MISO Modeling Department

December 9, 2013

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

MISO

ii

Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1

Background .................................................................................................................... 1

1.2

Drivers to Standardize Dynamic Models ........................................................................ 1

1.2.1

Increased Efficiency ................................................................................................ 1

1.2.2

Consistent Modeling Practices ................................................................................ 3

1.2.3

Equivalent Behavior/Response ............................................................................... 3

1.3

Software Platforms and Versions ................................................................................... 3

1.4

Next Steps ...................................................................................................................... 4

2 Standard Generator Component Model List .............................................................................. 5

2.1

Generator Models ........................................................................................................... 5

2.2

Exciter Models ................................................................................................................ 5

2.3

Turbine/Governor Models ............................................................................................... 6

2.4

Turbine Load Controller Models ..................................................................................... 7

2.5

Power System Stabilizer Models .................................................................................... 7

2.6

Compensator Models ..................................................................................................... 7

2.7

Wind Models ................................................................................................................... 7

2.8

PV Models ...................................................................................................................... 8

MISO

1
Introduction
For the 2014 cycle of the MISO Transmission Expansion Plan (MTEP) MISO intends to update
the dynamic model such that all generators are modeled using a component model from a
standard list which will be developed jointly with MISO staff and stakeholders. This was
originally proposed in the October 15th, 2013 Planning Subcommittee (PSC)1 and this document
is the initial list of standard component models.
MISO fully expects and intends this initial list to change as stakeholders review and provide
feedback on it. The goal is to come to agreement on a standard list prior to the MTEP14
dynamic model development in order to have all generators within the MISO footprint modeled
with a component dynamic from this standard list.

1.1 Background
In MTEP12 MISO started an effort to improve the numerical simulation performance of the
dynamic model by replacing older and simpler component models with newer and more
accurate component models. MISO worked jointly with stakeholders to replace the classical
generator model (GENCLS) and 3-phase induction machine model (CIMTR3) with more
accurate and appropriate models. Stakeholder response was very high and as a result the
MTEP12 and MTEP13 dynamic models no longer suffer from the numerical instability caused by
the GENCLS and CIMTR3 models.
As a continuation of this effort MISO is broadening the scope by establishing a standardized list
of generator component dynamic models.

1.2 Drivers to Standardize Dynamic Models

There are three main drivers to standardize dynamic models which are:
1. Increased efficiency
2. Consistent modeling practices
3. Equivalent behavior/response
Each of these drivers will be explained in further detail.
1.2.1 Increased Efficiency
Building and maintaining models takes a significant amount of time and effort. The task of
collecting and compiling the data used to create models is no easy task but for dynamic models
it becomes even more complicated by trying to make everything work together. Isolating issues
caused by a particular component model within a dynamics package is by itself a very
complicated task requiring extensive knowledge of the transmission system, various dynamic

Meeting Materials can be found at https://www.misoenergy.org/Events/Pages/PSC20131015.aspx

MISO

component models, and idiosyncrasies of the software tool. It becomes even more difficult when
user-defined models (UDMs) are incorporated into the dynamics package.
UDMs are typically provided as black boxes with little to no information on their inner workings.
Getting any information about a manufacture provided UDM requires non-disclosure
agreements be signed with multiple parties and it is very rare to obtain the complete block
diagram of a UDM. Without adequate information of a UDM it is very difficult to troubleshoot
issues associated with the UDM during the development of the dynamics package.
Troubleshooting UDMs becomes nearly impossible once the dynamic package is handed off to
other users for analysis. Often the only recourse to resolving an issue with a UDM is to simply
remove it from the dynamics package.
Quantifying the amount of time spent incorporating UDMs is difficult but consider the
composition of the MTEP13 dynamic package. Figure 1-1 shows the breakdown by model type
of the total number of unique models and cumulative MVA of generators in the MISO footprint
as modeled in MTEP13. Looking at wind generation modeled with a UDM and assuming an
equal amount of time is spent on each unique model means that MISO staff spends 28% of their
time to model only 3% of the generation installed. In reality the situation is worse as UDMs
require much more time than the generic models.

Number of unique models/effort

Cumulative MVA

4% 3%
7%

28%

4%

60%
8%

86%

Conventional Generation Generic models

Conventional Generation UDMs

Wind Generation Generic models

Wind Generation UDMs

Figure 1-1: Comparison of unique generator models to generator size

Although UDMs may provide the most accurate representation of a particular manufactures
generator it is not the most efficient use of time to incorporate it especially when generic models
exist which can adequately represent the generator in question. The imbalance of effort
required for UDMs compared to generic models is staggering but can be corrected by
establishing a standard list of models.
MISO

1.2.2 Consistent Modeling Practices

MISO has the largest geographical footprint of any Regional Transmission Operator (RTO) and
as a result it is highly desirable to establish consistent modeling practices across our footprint.
Currently, dynamic modeling practices vary across our footprint which leads to increased time
spent developing the dynamics package and troubleshooting it during studies. By establishing
consistent modeling practices such as a standard component model list, MISO staff can more
effectively perform the various studies across the entire footprint.
An additional benefit to establishing a standard component model list is enabling usage of
different software platforms. MISO currently develops the dynamic package exclusively for
PSS/E; however, not all of MISOs stakeholders use PSS/E and even internally MISO staff may
use different tools. Although this effort focuses on standardizing generator models and not all
dynamic models, it is a step in the direction to enable any available software tools to be used.
1.2.3 Equivalent Behavior/Response
In general, system performance results obtained using generic models is reasonably accurate
from a system planning perspective. These generic models have been developed through
collaborative efforts between industry experts, manufactures, end users, and software vendors
such that they can be used to appropriately model any generators response to a disturbance.
There are numerous reports and studies demonstrating that a properly tuned generic model will
provide an equivalent transient response compared to real-time measurements.
Furthermore, the generic models are widely accepted throughout the industry making them
amenable to real-time measurement based model validation techniques. Generic models allow
MISO to leverage the Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs) and Digital Fault Recorders (DFRs)
currently installed on the system to improve the quality of the dynamic models and match the
actual response of the system.

1.3 Software Platforms and Versions

For MTEP14, MISO will develop the powerflow and dynamics package in Siemens PTIs PSS/E
Version 32. As such the standard list is focused on PSS/E, however; compatibility with other
software platforms is still important and was considered. This list was created assuming the
following software versions:

Siemens PTI PSS/E Version 32

GE PSLF Version 18
PowerTech Labs TSAT Version 12

Please note that TSAT may not have a standard library model for all PSS/E or PSLF dynamic
component model but still has the ability to automatically read and convert them into the
appropriate TSAT format. Some models will be listed as UDM for TSAT, however; this should
not be confused with the term user-written model or UDM used in the context of PSS/E or
PSLF.

MISO

Also, understand that since the list is being created assuming the aforementioned software
versions, the newer versions of the renewable energy and static var system dynamic models
are not available.

1.4 Next Steps

This is the initial posting of the standard generator component models for stakeholder review.
Stakeholders are asked to:

Review the Standard Generator Component Model List (Section 2).

Provide feedback on the standard generator component model list.
o When requesting to add/remove a component model from the list, please provide
as much additional details as possible.

All feedback should be sent to Pat Jehring at pjehring@misoenergy.org by January 31st, 2014.
An updated list with stakeholder feedback will be presented at the February 18 th, 2014 PSC.

MISO

2
Standard Generator Component Model List
Please note that TSAT may not have a standard library model for all PSS/E or PSLF dynamic
component model but still has the ability to automatically read and convert them into the
appropriate TSAT format. Some models will be listed as UDM for TSAT, however; this should
not be confused with the term user-written model or UDM used in the context of PSS/E or
PSLF.

2.1 Generator Models

PSS/E V32

PSLF V18

TSAT V12

Description

CSTATT

stcon

UDM

Static Condenser FACTS

CSVGN1

vwscc

SVC Type 1

SCR Controlled Static

Var Source

CSVGN5

vwscc

SVC Type 2

SCR Controlled Static

Var Source

GENROE

genrou

DG0S2

GENROU

genrou

DG0S5

GENSAE

gensal

DG0S2

GENSAL

gensal

DG0S4

Notes
Not a direct
conversion for
PSLF
Not a direct
conversion for
PSLF
If combined with
STBSVC model
will convert to
SVC Type 3 in
TSAT

Round Rotor Generator

with Exponential
Saturation
Round Rotor Generator
with Quadratic Saturation
Salient Pole Generator
with Exponential
Saturation
Salient Pole Generator
with Quadratic Saturation

2.2 Exciter Models

PSS/E V32
ESDC1A
ESDC2A
DC3A
DC4B
ESAC1A
ESAC2A
ESAC3A
ESAC4A
ESAC5A
ESAC6A

MISO

PSLF V18
esdc1a
esdc2a
esdc3a
esdc4b
esac1a
esac2a
esac3a
esac4a
esac5a
esac6a

TSAT V12
EXC1
EXC1
UDM
UDM
EXC5
EXC6
EXC4
EXC30
EXC10
UDM

Description
1992 IEEE Type DC1A
1992 IEEE Type DC2A
2005 IEEE Type DC3A
2005 IEEE Type DC4B
1992 IEEE Type AC1A
1992 IEEE Type AC2A
1992 IEEE Type AC3A
1992 IEEE Type AC4A
1992 IEEE Type AC5A
1992 IEEE Type AC6A

Notes

PSS/E V32
AC7B
AC8B
ESST1A
ESST2A
ESST3A
ESST4B
ST5B
ST6B
ST7B
EXBAS

PSLF V18
esac7b
esac8b
esst1a
esst2a
esst3a
esst4b
esst5b
esst6b
esst7b
-

TSAT V12
UDM
UDM
EXC34
EXC7
EXC8
UDM
UDM
UDM
UDM
UDM

EXPIC1

expic1

UDM

SCRX

scrx

EXC30

SEXS

sexs

EXC30

Description
2005 IEEE Type AC7B
2005 IEEE Type AC8B
1992 IEEE Type ST1A
1992 IEEE Type ST2A
1992 IEEE Type ST3A
2005 IEEE Type ST4B
2005 IEEE Type ST5B
2005 IEEE Type ST6B
2005 IEEE Type ST7B
Basler Static Voltage
Regulator Feeding DC
Proportional/integral
Excitation
Bus or solid fed SCR
Bridge Excitation

Simplified Excitation

Notes

Only to be used
for future
machine where
excitation system
details are
unknown
Only to be used
for future
machine where
excitation system
details are
unknown

2.3 Turbine/Governor Models

PSS/E V32

PSLF V18

TSAT V12

DEGOV1
GAST
HYGOV

gast
hygov

UDM
GOV7
GOV20

IEEEG1

ieeeg1

GOV4

IEEEG2

ieeeg2

GOV22

IEEEG3
TGOV1

ieeeg3
tgov1

GOV21
GOV6

TGOV3

tgov3

GOV4

GGOV1

ggov1

UDM

PIDGOV

pidgov

UDM

MISO

Description
Woodward diesel
governor
Gas Turbine-governor
Hydro turbine-governor
1981 IEEE Type 1
Turbine-governor
1981 IEEE Type 2
Turbine-governor
1981 IEEE Type 3
Turbine-governor
Steam Turbine-governor
Modified IEEE Type 1
turbine-governor with
fast valving
GE General purpose
turbine-governor
Hydro turbine and
governor

Notes

2.4 Turbine Load Controller Models

PSS/E V32
LCFB1

PSLF V18
lcfb1

TSAT V12
UDM

Description
Turbine Load Controller

Notes

2.5 Power System Stabilizer Models

PSS/E V32
IEEEST
PSS2A
PSS2B
PSS3B
PSS4B

PSLF V18
ieest
pss2a
pss2b
pss3b
pss4b

TSAT V12
PSS1
PSS9
PSS9
UDM
UDM

STAB3

PSS1

STAB4

PSS12

Description
1981 IEEE PSS
1992 IEEE PSS2A
2005 IEEE PSS2B
2005 IEEE PSS3B
2005 IEEE PSS4B
Power Sensitive
Stabilizer
Power Sensitive
Stabilizer

svcwsc

SVC Type
3*

Supplementary Signal for

Static VAR System

STBSVC

Notes

For TSAT &

PSLF Embedded
in SVC Model

2.6 Compensator Models

PSS/E V32
IEEEVC

PSLF V18
-

TSAT V12
-

Description
1981 IEEE Voltage
Compensating model

REMCMP

Remote Bus Voltage

Signal

TSAT V12
WGNA,
WGNAT,
WGNAE
WGNB,
WGNBT,
WGNBE

Description
Generic Type 1 WTG

wt3g, wt3e,
wt3t, wt3p

WGNBC,
WGNBT,
WGNBE

Generic Type 3 WTG

wt4g, wt4e,
wt4t, wt4p

WGND,
WGNDT,
WGNBE
-

Generic Type 4 WTG

Notes
Embedded in
PSLF generator
record and TSAT
exciter model

2.7 Wind Models

PSS/E V32
WT1G1,
WT12T1,
WT12A1
WT2G1,
WT2E1,
WT12T1,
WT12A1
WT3G2,
WT3E1,
WT3T1,
WT3P1
WT4G1,
WT4E1,

PSLF V18
wt1g,
wt1t,wt1p

W4G2U,

MISO

wt2g, wt2e,
wt2t, wt2p

Notes

Generic Type 2 WTG

Updated Generic Type 4

Includes
7

W4E2U

WTG

additional
parameters to
model Siemens
WTG

Description

Notes
No standard
model currently
available across
software
platforms

2.8 PV Models
PSS/E V32

MISO

PSLF V18

TSAT V12